Can You Sue Uber for a Car Accident in California?

By Javier Mayer Accident Lawyer

Meta Description – Injured in an Uber accident in California? Learn who’s liable, how the new 2026 SB 371 insurance limits affect your claim, and the steps to take after a crash.

If you are injured in an Uber accident in California, under certain circumstances you can file a claim for compensation against Uber, the driver, or any other party responsible for the accident. However, who exactly the claim can be filed against, and through which route, depends on the driver’s app status at the time of the accident and the applicable insurance coverage, which is governed by California’s Transportation Network Company (TNC) law.

Determining liability here is more complex than in a typical car accident, because Uber is not a taxi company and is not your driver’s employer either, but merely a technology platform. Because of this structural difference, it is essential to have a clear understanding of the applicable insurance framework and the new legal changes taking effect in 2026 before pursuing compensation.

So in today’s article, we will discuss:

  • The driver’s “app status”
  • SB 371 and underinsured coverage
  • SB 623: new rules for medical bill claims
  • Who should you claim against: the driver or Uber?
  • Does the arbitration clause take away your right to sue?

If you have been the victim of an Uber or rideshare accident in California, I hope today’s blog will be extremely helpful for you.

Liability in an Uber Accident Depends on the Driver’s “App Status”

In California, legal and financial liability and insurance coverage after an Uber accident depend mainly on the driver’s “app status,” or login state, at the moment of the accident. Under California law (specifically AB 2293), this entire matter is divided into four periods:

App Is Offline

If the driver is not logged into the Uber app and is driving for personal reasons, and gets into an accident in that state, it is treated as an ordinary personal car accident. Uber bears no liability for this accident. In this case, compensation is handled through the driver’s own personal auto insurance.

App Is Online, Waiting for a Ride Request

If the driver is logged into the app, waiting to receive a ride, but has not yet been matched with a trip or rider, and an accident occurs in this state, the driver’s personal insurance company typically refuses to provide coverage. Therefore, by law, Uber provides limited third-party liability insurance.

Insurance coverage: Up to $50,000 per person for bodily injury. Up to $100,000 total per accident for bodily injury. Up to $25,000 for property damage.

After the Ride Is Accepted (Match Accepted / En Route)

If the driver has accepted a ride request and is heading to the rider’s location to pick them up, and an accident occurs at this moment, Uber’s commercial insurance becomes active. Uber provides up to $1,000,000 (1 million dollars) in third-party liability insurance coverage. If the driver is at fault, the injured pedestrian or the other driver receives this coverage.

During the Trip

If the rider is in the car and the driver is taking them to their destination, and an accident occurs during this time, the full liability for the accident falls under Uber’s insurance coverage. Uber provides up to $1,000,000 (1 million dollars) in coverage for third-party liability and for the protection of riders.

The Major 2026 Change: SB 371 and the Reduction of Underinsured Coverage

In terms of rideshare insurance in California, Senate Bill 371 is a landmark and controversial change. Approved by Governor Gavin Newsom, this law took effect on January 1, 2026. As a result, California’s Public Utilities Code (Section 5433) has been amended, putting the financial protection of riders and drivers at significant risk in the event of an accident. The main points of this change are discussed in detail below:

The Major Change: A Sharp Reduction in Underinsured (UM/UIM) Coverage

The biggest impact of this law has been on Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist (UM/UIM) coverage. This insurance comes into play when, while an Uber trip is active, an accident occurs due to the fault of another (third-party) driver, and that at-fault driver either has no insurance or does not have adequate coverage.

Before 2026, if you were a passenger in the car (Period 3) and were involved in an accident, Uber/Lyft was required to provide a massive $1,000,000 ($1 million) UM/UIM safety net. But starting in 2026, this mandatory limit has been cut by as much as 94% in one stroke. Under the current rule, the coverage is:

Per Person: Up to $60,000. Per Accident/Incident: Up to $300,000.

Why Was This Law Introduced? (Uber and Lyft’s Arguments)

This bill was passed following long-standing demands from companies like Uber and Lyft. Their main arguments were:

Reducing excessive operating costs: In California, nearly one-third of the ride fare was going toward insurance. This law would reduce the company’s insurance costs. Fare control and increased driver earnings: The companies claim that reducing insurance costs would lower ride fares for ordinary riders and make it possible to increase drivers’ earnings. Curbing excessive litigation: Rideshare apps claim that because of the large $1 million coverage, many lawyers were turning even minor accidents into large lawsuits for profit, and this would be curbed.

Negative Impact on Riders and Drivers (Concerns from Lawyers and Experts)

Consumer rights advocacy groups and personal injury lawyers consider this law extremely risky. In a serious road accident, if a rider suffers a severe head injury (TBI) or spinal damage, just one week of ICU and surgery costs at a California hospital alone can exceed $60,000. As a result, the remaining large amount of medical expenses would have to be paid by the victim out of pocket.

If there are 4 passengers in an Uber vehicle and an uninsured vehicle crashes into it, under the new law, all passengers combined will not receive more than a total of $300,000. This is extremely little in the case of a serious accident.

What Remains Unchanged (Liability Insurance)

It is important to remember that the SB 371 law did not reduce Uber’s third-party liability coverage. If the Uber driver is themselves at fault for the accident, the injured rider or third party will still receive Uber’s core $1,000,000 ($1 million) general liability insurance benefit. The change only applies when the fault lies with another driver who does not have adequate insurance.

Read More:

SB 623: New Rules for Medical Bill Claims (Effective from 2027)

California Senate Bill 623 (SB 623), known as the “Fair Medical Billing & Rideshare Safety Act,” was signed into law by California Governor Gavin Newsom on June 25, 2026. This new law will take effect for accidents occurring on or after January 1, 2027.

However, it is important to remember that this does not apply to all ordinary car accidents in California, but mainly brings new rules and restrictions for medical bill claims in car accidents involving rideshare or Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) such as Uber and Lyft. The main changes under this law are discussed in detail with supporting information below:

Setting a Cap on Lien-Based Medical Bills

People injured in car accidents who do not have health insurance often enter into agreements with doctors stating that the doctor’s bill will be paid from the settlement money after the case is resolved. This is called a “medical lien.”

Under the new Civil Code Section 3333.9, effective from 2027, a plaintiff will not be able to recover the full bill claimed by a doctor as compensation. For medical treatment based on a medical lien, the maximum limit for recovering compensation will be up to the 70th percentile of the FAIR Health database for that treatment in the specific geographic area. However, if the plaintiff can prove that a rare or specialized treatment was needed that was not easily available elsewhere, only then can an amount higher than this be claimed.

Prohibition on Presenting Excessive Bills in Court

Under the law, neither party may present to a jury or judge any medical invoice, bill, or lien amount in court that exceeds the 70th percentile set by the FAIR Health database as evidence. Even the existence of this legal restriction itself cannot be directly discussed in front of the jury.

Transparency and Discovery in Lien Sales and Transfers

Sometimes medical institutions sell their outstanding medical liens to a third-party finance company. All information regarding such lien sales or financial transactions must now be disclosed or made discoverable in the legal process. If a medical lien has been sold to a finance company at a discounted price, the amount recoverable as compensation will be limited to the amount actually paid.

Stopping Unethical Collusion Between Lawyers and Doctors

Due to lawyers’ financial interests, there have been allegations that patients were often referred for excessive or unnecessary treatment. Therefore, under this law, a contingency-fee-based personal injury lawyer cannot refer a client to a medical facility in which that lawyer or a family member has ownership or financial investment. In addition, taking referral fees or kickbacks is now completely prohibited.

Additional Safety Provisions for Rideshare Passengers

Alongside medical billing, this law adds some important rules for rideshare companies:

Mandatory criminal background checks must be conducted before a driver’s account is activated and annually thereafter. The scope for banning individuals convicted of serious crimes such as domestic violence, weapons offenses, or driving under the influence from becoming drivers has been expanded further. Legal provision has been made for a same-gender (women-to-women) matching feature in the app, for the benefit of female riders and female drivers.

This law is essentially the result of a historic settlement between Uber and the Consumer Attorneys of California (CAOC), the organization representing California’s trial lawyers. In the 2026 California ballot election, both sides had brought forward two competing propositions that could have broadly affected California’s entire personal injury law. To avoid a costly ballot fight, this compromise bill, SB 623, was subsequently passed. To learn more about California personal injury law, you can read the articles on InjuryRights101.

Who Should You Claim Against: The Driver or Uber?

In California, after an Uber accident, who exactly you should file a claim against mainly depends on what the Uber driver’s “app status” was at the time of the accident and what role you were in (passenger, another driver, or pedestrian). Under California law, Uber has its own three-period insurance policy. The detailed workflow is given below:

If You Are an Uber Passenger

If an accident occurs while you are inside the Uber vehicle as a passenger, Uber’s $1 million third-party liability insurance is active. In this case, you would file your claim directly against Uber’s insurance company. There is no need to use the driver’s personal insurance here, because during an active trip on the app, Uber’s corporate policy acts as the primary coverage.

If You Are Another Driver, a Passenger in Another Vehicle, or a Pedestrian

If the Uber vehicle hits you, the driver’s app status needs to be checked. If the driver had the app on and was driving while waiting for a ride, and an accident occurs in this state, you must first file a claim with the driver’s personal insurance company. If the driver’s personal insurance refuses to pay compensation or does not provide coverage, then Uber’s secondary insurance kicks in. Under California law, at this stage Uber provides up to $50,000 per person and up to $100,000 per accident in bodily injury coverage. If the Uber driver was on the way to pick up a rider, or was already carrying a rider, and an accident occurs in this state, you would file a claim directly against Uber’s insurance company, because Uber’s core $1 million liability insurance policy is in effect during this time.

What If the Driver Was Not at Fault?

If the accident was not caused by the fault of the Uber driver but by a third-party driver, you must file a claim against that at-fault driver’s insurance. However, if that driver has no insurance (uninsured) or does not have adequate insurance (underinsured), then as an Uber passenger you can claim compensation from Uber itself under Uber’s UM/UIM (Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist) policy.

Filing a Lawsuit

If the matter is not resolved through an insurance claim and you have to file a lawsuit in court, California personal injury lawyers typically file the lawsuit jointly against both the Uber driver and the Uber company. Even though California law treats Uber drivers as “independent contractors,” both parties are included in the lawsuit for the purpose of determining the company’s insurance policy and liability for the accident.

Does the Arbitration Clause Take Away Your Right to Sue?

In California, Uber’s arbitration clause after an accident does not take away your right to seek compensation, but it does partially alter or narrow your constitutional right to a jury trial or lawsuit in a regular court. Uber’s General Terms of Use contain a mandatory arbitration clause. Whenever you click the “I Agree” button while using the app, you unknowingly consent to this term. How this clause works after a car accident and its limitations are explained below:

The Right to a Jury Trial and Open Court Is Waived

If you are an Uber passenger, because of this agreement you cannot go to a regular civil court and pursue a jury trial against the Uber company. Instead, your claim must be resolved through private arbitration, such as through a neutral arbitrator at AAA or JAMS. The decision from this process is final, and the opportunity to appeal to a higher court is extremely limited.

Does This Apply to Everyone?

The arbitration clause is only binding on those who have signed or agreed to Uber’s terms of service. If you are an Uber rider or driver, this clause will apply strictly to you, because you agreed to the terms while using the app.

However, if you are a third party (another driver or a pedestrian), and the Uber vehicle hits a pedestrian or another driver, Uber cannot impose the arbitration clause on them, because they never agreed to Uber’s terms of service. As a result, a third party can file a regular lawsuit directly in court against Uber and the driver.

It Takes Away the Right to a Class Action or Joint Lawsuit

Uber’s arbitration clause contains a class action waiver, a term that revokes the right to a joint lawsuit. This means that even if many people are harmed by similar accidents caused by Uber, they cannot come together to file a joint or class-action lawsuit against Uber. Each injured person must individually pursue their own claim.

Final Words

If you are injured in an Uber accident in California, you undoubtedly have the right to seek compensation, but as this article has made clear, one thing stands out: while the answer to “can you sue” is a simple “yes,” the path is by no means straightforward. Who you should file a claim against is determined by the driver’s app status at the moment of the accident, how much compensation you receive is affected by SB 371’s reduced UM/UIM coverage, and starting in 2027, SB 623 will change how medical bills are calculated. Added to this are the limitations of the arbitration clause and a statute of limitations of just two years, after which no claim can legally stand.

Taking all these layers into account and deciding on the right strategy is difficult for an ordinary person to manage alone, especially when you are dealing with a physical injury and are busy with treatment and rehabilitation. This is exactly where an experienced California personal injury attorney makes a difference. They know which insurance policy to file a claim under, how to counter Uber’s or their insurance company’s initial lowball offer, and when going to court is more advantageous than settling.

So, without delay, consult an experienced lawyer as soon as possible after an accident, because the fresher the evidence and the sooner the claim reaches the right party, the greater the chance of receiving fair compensation.